-
Interim report of the
Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence
- Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs –
The Honourable Roméo A. Dallaire, Chair
The Honourable Donald Neil Plett, Deputy Chair
MARCH 2013
-
Ce document est disponible en français
This report and the subcommittees’ proceedings are available online at :
www.senate-senat.ca/veac.asp
Hard copies of this document are available by contacting
The Senate Committees Directorate at (613) 990-0088 or by email at
http://www.senate-senat.ca/veac.asp
-
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON VETERANS AFFAIRS .ii
ORDER OF REFERENCE ..................................................................... iii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................... v
RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................... vii
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 1
The NVC as a living document ........................................................... 5
Limitations with the NVC ................................................................... 7
Canada’s Social Contract with its Veterans ........................................ 8
Are families clients too? .................................................................... 12
VAC’s Relationship with Veterans ................................................... 15
Communication ................................................................................. 17
PERCEIVED LIMITATIONS OF THE NVC ....................................... 17
Sense of Security ............................................................................... 20
Quality of life .................................................................................... 23
Reintegration into Civilian Life ........................................................ 25
Outreach ............................................................................................ 27
Disability Award ............................................................................... 28
CONCLUSION ....................................................................................... 31
LIST OF WITNESSES ............................................................................ A
APPENDIX A .......................................................................................... H
-
ii
MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON VETERANS
AFFAIRS
The Honourable Roméo A. Dallaire, Chair
The Honourable Donald Neil Plett, Deputy Chair
and
The Honourable Senators:
Joseph A. Day
Pierre Claude Nolin
Pamela Wallin
Other Senators who participated in the work of the Committee: The
Honourable Senators Banks*, Dickson*, Downe, Kenny, Manning,
Meighen*, Pépin*, Raine,
* retired Senators
Staff:
Josée Thérien, Clerk of the Committee
From the Library of Parliament:
Martin Auger, Analyst
James Cox, Analyst
Jean-Rodrigue Paré, Analyst
-
iii
ORDER OF REFERENCE
Extract from the Journals of the Senate of Wednesday, June 22, 2011:
The Honourable Senator Wallin moved, seconded by the Honourable
Senator Martin:
That the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and
Defence be authorized to study:
(a) services and benefits provided to members of the Canadian
Forces; to veterans who have served honourably in Her Majesty's
Canadian Armed Forces in the past; to members and former members
of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and its antecedents; and all of
their families;
(b) commemorative activities undertaken by the Department of
Veterans' Affairs Canada, to keep alive for all Canadians the memory
of Canadian veterans' achievements and sacrifices; and
(c) continuing implementation of the New Veterans' Charter;
That the papers and evidence received and taken and the work
accomplished by the Committee on this subject during the Fortieth
Parliament be referred to the Committee; and
That the Committee report to the Senate no later than June 17, 2012,
and that the Committee retain all powers necessary to publicize its
findings until 90 days after the tabling of the final report.
After debate,
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
_________________
-
iv
Delegation to the subcommittee
Extract from the Minutes of the Standing Senate Committee on National
Security and Defence of Monday, October 3, 2011
It was moved
That the order of reference regarding veterans affairs adopted by the
Senate on Wednesday, June 22, 2011, be delegated to the Subcommittee
on Veterans Affairs.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Clerk of the Senate
Gary W. O’Brien
Extract from the Journals of the Senate of Thursday, June 14, 2012:
The Honourable Senator Plett moved, seconded by the Honourable
Senator Patterson:
That, notwithstanding the order of the Senate adopted on Wednesday,
June 22, 2011, the date for the final report of the Standing Senate
Committee on National Security and Defence in relation to its study on
the services and benefits provided to members of the Canadian Forces,
to veterans, and to members and former members of the Royal Canadian
Mounted Police and their families be extended from June 17, 2012 to
June 28, 2013.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Clerk of the Senate
Gary W. O’Brien
-
v
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The New Veterans Charter (NVC)1 was unanimously adopted by both
Houses of Parliament and received Royal Assent on 13 May 2005. It
came into force on 1 April 2006. The NVC is and was always
considered to be a living document. On 17 November 2010, Bill C-55,
An Act to Amend the Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-
Establishment and Compensation Act and the Pension Act, short title,
Enhanced New Veterans Charter Act, was introduced in the House of
Commons. It received Royal Assent on 24 March 2011 and came into
force on 3 October 2011. It dealt with certain limitations of the original
NVC.
The Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence
Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs (hereafter ‘the Subcommittee’)
decided to determine if the NVC is delivering programs of compensation
and benefits it was designed to deliver.
Our premise is that all Canadian Forces (CF) personnel and veterans
who turn to Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) should receive the best
care, benefits and service our country has to offer. Moreover, given the
fact that CF personnel and veterans accepted unlimited liability to serve
the government and people of Canada, if they die or are injured as a
result of that service, programs providing them with compensation,
benefits and care should be the best in Canada.
Overall, we found that VAC and the NVC serve the majority of CF
personnel and veterans well. However, we found that there are four
issues that impact and affect the implementation of the NVC. First is the
absence of a clear, universally agreed ‘social contract’ between the
people of Canada, represented by their government, on one hand, and
CF members and veterans on the other. We feel that the existing
1 The NVC was introduced on 20 April 2005 in the House of Commons as Bill C-45, An Act to provide services,
assistance and compensation to or in respect of Canadian Forces (CF) members and veterans and to make
amendments to certain Acts, short title, Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-establishment and
Compensation Act.
-
vi
Veterans Bill of Rights does not fully achieve this end. In the absence of
such a social contract, or even any substantive debate, disagreements
and misunderstandings abound. Second, the NVC should embody the
vision of a meaningful relationship between the people of Canada and
CF members and veterans, along with their families. Third, veteran
transition to civilian life would benefit from a better understanding of
whole-of-government obligations to the care and compensation of CF
personnel and veterans injured in the course of their service to Canada.
Fourth, there should be clear and effective communication between
VAC and serving CF members. While there may be some difficulty with
the quality of VAC outreach initiatives, there is at least an equal onus
that must fall on the CF chain of command at all levels, to become more
engaged in ensuring serving personnel are fully aware of VAC programs
and how to access them.
Our report also notes that some financial benefits of the NVC are
modeled on an insurance plan that was designed for non-service-related
injuries.
VAC should do more to improve its outreach and enhance
communications with CF members, veterans and their families. We
recommend the hiring of more veterans as frontline workers and the
establishment of a more formal network with the Royal Canadian
Legion and the various service, branch and regimental associations
across the country, to enhance VAC’s ability to keep track of serving
military personnel and veterans, particularly Reservists, who reside
beyond the major urban centres.
Government also needs to continue to enable meaningful programs to
allow disabled veterans to return to work as quickly as possible.
We have produced nine recommendations that follow.
-
vii
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Subcommittee recommends that:
Recommendation 1. The Government of Canada table a document that
articulates and promotes the social contract between the people of
Canada and their veterans.
Recommendation 2. The Government of Canada encourage the
provinces and territories to endorse the social contract to reflect a
common understanding and acceptance of the needs of veterans. Such
endorsement should not interfere with provincial or territorial
constitutional rights.
Recommendation 3. The Veterans Bill of Rights include appropriate
rights to be enjoyed by veterans. These rights would be based on the
veterans’ and their spouses’ acknowledgement of unlimited liability in
the service of Canada.
Recommendation 4. Within the framework of the New Veterans
Charter, Veterans Affairs Canada increase their efforts to promote and
address family roles and requirements associated with injuries and
disabilities suffered in the line of duty.
Recommendation 5. The Government of Canada continue to review the
Earnings Loss Benefit to ensure veterans are receiving the appropriate
level of compensation.
Recommendation 6. The Government of Canada consider streamlining
the way that veterans are able to access the internal appointment process
throughout the federal public service and ensure that veterans are given
priority and assistance in the process.
-
viii
Recommendation 7. Veterans Affairs Canada and key stakeholders
establish more effective formal links to better support veterans.
Recommendation 8. Veterans Affairs Canada, in concert with the Royal
Canadian Legion, consider establishing representation in support of
Legion branches.
Recommendation 9. Veterans Affairs Canada consider involving more
veterans throughout Canada to enhance the relevance of their outreach
activities.
-
1
INTRODUCTION
Veterans Affairs is one of those rare portfolios that requires cooperative,
non-partisan attention in both Houses of Parliament. Veterans and their
families have served all Canadians, no matter their political inclinations,
their origins or their habits. There have been differences of opinion
about the extent of veterans programs and their administration, but not
about the fundamental concept or the need for Canada to have a
comprehensive program of benefits for them. This is an important
legacy.
Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) is responsible for the administration of
sixteen pieces of legislation, one of which is the New Veterans Charter
(NVC).2 It replaces the Pension Act, redefines the compensation system
for veterans in the event of injury, disability or death, and provides a
range of services to assist veterans and their families. The NVC aims to
promote social and occupational reintegration for veterans. The specifics
of services provided and details on eligibility conditions are set out in
the Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-establishment and
Compensation Regulations.3 Bill C-55, the Enhanced New Veterans
Charter deals with certain limitations of the original New Veterans
Charter.
The NVC does not define veterans’ eligibility for health care programs
(health benefits, Veterans Independence Program, long-term care, etc.).
These programs are set out in the Veterans Health Care Regulations,
which are independent from the NVC.4
The Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence
Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs (hereafter ‘the Subcommittee’)
decided to conduct a detailed study of the NVC, to determine if it is
2 Veterans Affairs Canada, Legislation Administered by Veterans Affairs Canada,
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/general/sub.cfm?source=department/Legislation/actsVAC. An outline of the NVC is at
Appendix A. 3 Department of Justice, http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/SOR-2006-50/index.html.
4 Ibid. http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/SOR-90-594/index.html.
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/general/sub.cfm?source=department/Legislation/actsVAChttp://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/SOR-2006-50/index.htmlhttp://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/SOR-90-594/index.html
-
2
delivering the programs of compensation and benefits it was designed to
deliver and that our CF personnel, veterans and their families deserve.
The Subcommittee gathered evidence for its study of the implementation
of the NVC from May 2006 until December 2010. When opening a
meeting on 12 December 2007, the Chair, Senator Michael Meighen
outlined the Subcommittee’s mandate this way:
The Charter has now been in place for more than a year and
a half; as such, it can be reviewed to determine whether its
implementation has been as effective as it was intended to be
and if, indeed, it is an evolving, living, breathing document.5
The NVC was introduced in the Senate as Bill C-45 on 10 May 2005
and from the beginning it was recognized that it contained some gaps
that could be dealt with through the amending process once it became
law.6 Bill C-45 passed with unanimous agreement in both the House of
Commons and the Senate. It received Royal Assent on 13 May 2005 and
came into force on 1 April 2006.
Amendments to the NVC were tabled as Bill C-55 on 17 November
2010, received Royal Assent on 24 March 2011, and came into force on
3 October 2011. They fix issues of concern for severely disabled
veterans who were in receipt of both a pension and a disability award,
introduce an annual supplement of $12,000 for eligible veterans who are
“totally and permanently incapacitated”, and offer the option of
receiving the disability award as a lump-sum payment, as yearly
payments, or as a combination of yearly payments and a lump-sum
payment.
5 The Hon. Michael Meighen, Proceedings of the Senate Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, 12 December 2008,
http://www.parl.gc.ca/39/2/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/02ev-
e.htm?Language=E&Parl=39&Ses=2&comm_id=79. 6 See the speech of Lieutenant-General, The Hon. Roméo Dallaire, Legisinfo, The Senate of Canada, 10 May 2005,
http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/chambus/senate/deb-e/057db_2005-05-10-
e.htm?Language=E&Parl=38&Ses=1#41.
http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/chambus/senate/deb-e/057db_2005-05-10-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=38&Ses=1#41http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/chambus/senate/deb-e/057db_2005-05-10-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=38&Ses=1#41
-
3
Amendments to the Regulations also came into force in October 2011,
guaranteeing that the income of a veteran participating in a rehabilitation
program would not fall below $40,000.
These changes, reaching an estimated cost of $130 million over ten
years, have been generally well received as a good first step.
To begin, the Subcommittee wishes to recognize that the overwhelming
majority of VAC clients are being served well and are satisfied with the
support being provided. The 2010 VAC client survey indicated that
VAC’s programs and services are meeting client needs.7 The majority of
clients are satisfied with the programs and services offered by the
Department.
According to this VAC survey, CF modern day veterans provided lower
ratings compared with other clients, indicating that this group is more
likely to have experienced difficulty in contacting VAC, and they also
offer lower ratings of VAC staff members. Overall, CF Veterans are
less likely to agree that the programs and services offered by VAC are
meeting their basic needs – a phenomenon explored later in this report.
The Subcommittee heard from a number of witnesses who offered
specific criticisms of the NVC, stating that the NVC may contain some
limitations and that the implementation of the NVC has not been as
effective as intended. However, some of these limitations have been
addressed with the implementation of Bill C-55, the Enhanced New
Veterans Charter Act, and the amendments to the NVC Regulations.
We concluded that the NVC, as a living document, could be more
responsive to the evolving needs of its mandate. However changes made
in Bill C-55 addressed some of these concerns. We feel that VAC should
continue with its institutional evolution to more effectively deliver its
mandated programs and services to veterans. A complementary
obligation exists within DND senior management and the CF chain of
7 Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC), 2010 National Client Survey,
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/general/sub.cfm?source=department/reports/ncs10/summary.
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/general/sub.cfm?source=department/reports/ncs10/summary
-
4
command to ensure serving CF personnel and their spouses understand
and take advantage of VAC programs and services available to them.
A pictorial representation of an ideal situation as viewed by this
committee is included below.
When a normal military career is interrupted by a severe, career-ending
injury, the desired outcome is that the veteran and his or her family
should still enjoy a normal quality of life. To achieve this end, four
aspects of quality of life must be addressed – the veteran’s health,
income, the opportunity to fulfill one’s potential and the veteran’s
NORMAL
MILITARY
CAREER
NORMAL
QUALITY
OF LIFE
HEALTH
INCOME
FULFILLING POTENTIAL
SOCIETAL POSITION
Injury
CURRENT STATUS
DESIRED OUTCOME
HEALTH = Diagnosis, treatment, self-care
INCOME
FULFILLING POTENTIAL
SOCIETAL POSITION
= Recognition
= Rehabilitation, Education, Disability Award
= ELP, SISIP, Military pension, personal earnings
-
5
position in society. VAC currently has programs that impact each of
these thrusts; however, changes in the NVC must address deficiencies in
these programs to attain the desired end.
The NVC as a living document
The veteran community was generally and genuinely happy with the
enactment of the NVC, but in late 2010 that no longer seemed to be the
case. Through our study, we came to see that the potential source of this
dissatisfaction lay in a perception that changes to the NVC did not occur
in a timely manner.
During debates that led to the passage of the NVC in both Houses of
Parliament, all parties recognized limitations in the details of the
legislation and some individual veterans advised against rushing ahead
with the Bill.8 Nonetheless it was passed unanimously. The NVC has
been described as a living document by Ministers of Veterans Affairs, as
such it was always understood changes would be made to the legislation
as limitations were found.
The charter, however, is not a destination. It is not a place
where we can stop and declare our work done. Instead, it is a
new path, a living, breathing document that will evolve with
the changing needs of our veterans and their families.9
Official advisory groups and a number of veterans associations
identified issues that required correction. The New Veterans Charter
Advisory Group (NVCAG), the Gerontological Advisory Council, the
8 Captain Sean Bruyea (Retired), Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance, “Evidence,”
11 May 2005, http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/fina-e/23ev-
e.htm?Language=E&Parl=38&Ses=1&comm_id=13.Captain Bruyea suggested, “My point is, why are we rushing
something through that is so important? I recommend that the problem areas be taken to the bases and that the
Operational Trauma and Stress Support Centres be consulted for feedback on the legislation itself. ...I recommend
that the Senate take the time to treat this with the importance it deserves by having Canadians at large provide
feedback.” 9 The Honourable Gregory Thompson, Proceedings of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, “Evidence,” 31 May
2006, http://www.parl.gc.ca/39/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/01evb-
e.htm?Language=E&Parl=39&Ses=1&comm_id=79.
http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/fina-e/23ev-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=38&Ses=1&comm_id=13http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/fina-e/23ev-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=38&Ses=1&comm_id=13http://www.parl.gc.ca/39/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/01evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=39&Ses=1&comm_id=79http://www.parl.gc.ca/39/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/01evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=39&Ses=1&comm_id=79
-
6
Special Needs Advisory Group, and the House of Commons’ Standing
Committee on Veterans Affairs all provided overall recommendations to
VAC. Together these groups submitted over 200 recommendations, a
number of which have already been implemented. They submitted
formal reports to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and Veterans Affairs
Canada.
The Chair: when the committee, of which you are the chair
and which is comprised of five veterans and five clinicians,
makes its report to Veterans Affairs Canada, what reaction
do you receive? I believe you said there have been four
reports. What do you feel about the reaction you get towards
those reports, which I presume reflect some of these views?
Major Henwood: Absolutely. We are an advisory committee;
and on the reports we submit to Veterans Affairs for the
department's review, the feedback has been verbal. They
have identified that many of our recommendations and
suggestions are good.10
The first Veterans Ombudsman, Colonel (Retired) Patrick Stogran
became the public figure for those veterans who were dissatisfied with
the NVC.11
From 2009 to 2011, VAC conducted a comprehensive, three-phased
evaluation of the relevance and effectiveness of the NVC programs.
Reports on each phase were regularly posted on the VAC website, but
not with any significant notice to the public, or the veteran community,
that such reports were available for study.12
The evaluation focussed on
existing NVC programs and did not address perceived deficiencies.
10
The Honourable Michael Meighen, Chair, and Major Bruce Henwood (Retired), Chair, Special Needs Advisory
Group, Proceedings of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, “Evidence,” 16 June 2010,
http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/05evb-
e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79. 11
CBC News, “Ombudsman slams ‘deceptive’ Veterans Affairs,” 17 August 2010,
http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/08/17/veterans-ombudsman-stogran.html. 12
Veterans Affairs Canada, “Departmental Audit and Evaluation Reports,”
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/department/reports/deptaudrep..
http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/05evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/05evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/department/reports/deptaudrep
-
7
The adoption of Bill C-55 in March 2011 has appeased some of this
discontent by showing that constructive changes could be made.
However, in the five years between the coming into force of the NVC
and the adoption of Bill C-55, the trust between the veteran community
and VAC has been challenged by issues directly or indirectly related to
the NVC.
Limitations with the NVC
In the course of our study, we found that there are four issues that impact
and affect the implementation of the NVC.
First is the absence of a clear, universally agreed ‘social contract’
between the people of Canada, represented by their government, on one
hand, and CF members and veterans on the other. We feel that the
existing Veterans Bill of Rights does not fully achieve this end. In the
absence of such a social contract, or even any substantive debate,
disagreements and misunderstandings abound.
Second, the NVC should embody the vision of a meaningful relationship
between the people of Canada and CF and veterans, along with their
families.
Third, veteran transition to civilian life would benefit from a better
understanding of whole-of-government obligations to the care and
compensation of CF personnel and veterans injured in the course of their
service to Canada.
Fourth, there should be clear and effective communication between
VAC and serving CF members. While there may be some difficulty with
the quality of VAC outreach initiatives, there is at least an equal onus
that must fall on the CF chain of command at all levels, to become more
engaged in ensuring serving personnel are fully aware of VAC programs
and how to access them.
-
8
Each of these four issues includes a number of sub-issues. For example,
full consideration of the needs of military families will involve
discussion of the role of provincial and territorial governments in
providing health care services to veterans and families alike.
Canada’s Social Contract with its Veterans
The absence of agreement and clarity on such a social contract
sometimes leads directly to conflicting expectations. As one young
disabled soldier stated, “We were ready to give up everything for our
country. Should misfortune strike, I hope that our country would be
willing to do the same for us.”13
A senior CF officer asked, “Do we have the obligation to meet people’s
expectations?”14
History shows that the consistent approach of Canadian governments has
been to provide support and assistance to help veterans reintegrate into
Canadian society and become productive citizens once again.
In 1944, a pamphlet aimed at informing Canadian military personnel
who were about to be released from the armed forces about government
plans for the rehabilitation of those in uniform, entitled Back to Civil
Life, said that “The objective of Canada’s plan for the rehabilitation of
her armed forces is that every man or woman discharged from the forces
shall be in a position to earn a living.”15
It was supported with this
explanation of the overall rationale applied:
Canada’s rehabilitation belief is that the answer to civil re-
establishment is a job, and the answer to a job is fitness and
training for that job. Our ambition is that these men and 13
Corporal Martin Renaud, Proceedings of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, “Evidence,” 12 May 2010,
http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/03evb-
e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79 14
Major Jacques Lasalle, Proceedings of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, 12 May 2010. 15
Minister of Pensions and National Health, Back to Civil Life, 2nd
ed. (Revised 25 August 1944),
http://www.ptbo.igs.net/~djdelong/post_war/Back_to_Civilian_Live_1944_edited.pdf.
http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/03evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/03evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79http://www.ptbo.igs.net/~djdelong/post_war/Back_to_Civilian_Live_1944_edited.pdf
-
9
women who have taken up arms in defence of their country
and their ideals of freedom shall not be penalized for the time
they have spent in the services and our desire is that they
shall be fitted in every possible way to take their place in
Canada’s civil and economic life.16
Disabled veterans unable to reintegrate as a working member of
Canadian society, could be provided care for life, based on the degree
and nature of their infirmity, in federally run long-term care facilities.
VAC initiated a Review of Veterans’ Care Needs in 1996. The first two
phases of this study resulted in some positive changes and the
establishment of the VAC Gerontological Council in 1997.
Phase Three began in 1999. It revealed the human cost born by veterans,
CF members and their families faced with an increased operational
tempo and simultaneous government budget cuts throughout the 1990s.
Related surveys and studies found that nearly half of the respondents
were dissatisfied CF and VAC services and attention given to injured
and disabled veterans and CF members, and the families of those CF
members killed on duty.17
The Phase Three report of the Review of Veterans’ Care Needs yielded
28 key findings, including the judgment that the pension process was an
overused and inappropriate tool with which to address many client
needs. It found that CF members and their families lacked appropriate
transition services to help them adjust to civilian life. It also noted that
VAC staff needed to be better equipped to communicate with and serve
veterans and CF members.
Subsequent changes were made in a number of areas. The CF Service
Income Security Insurance Plan (SISIP) was amended to provide lump-
sum payments to CF members below the rank of Colonel with lump-sum
16
Ibid., “Forward.” 17
VAC-CF Advisory Council, Honouring Canada’s Commitment: “Opportunity with Security” for Canadian
Forces Veterans and Their Families in the 21st Century, Veterans Affairs Canada (March 2004),18.
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/clients/sub.cfm?source=forces/nvc/discuss_paper.
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/clients/sub.cfm?source=forces/nvc/discuss_paper
-
10
payments in the event of accidental dismemberment in the line of duty.
A new Operational Stress Injury (OSI) Centre was created within VAC’s
one remaining hospital at Ste. Anne de Bellevue, Qc. New mental health
clinics were opened at VAC long-term care sites. VAC and DND also
strengthened their working relationship; in 1999, for example, the two
departments formed a joint steering committee to review issues related
to veterans care and in 2000 established the VAC-DND Advisory
Council. Finally, the definition of ‘veteran’ was clarified. On 29 March
2001, the Minister of Veterans Affairs said, “the designation ‘veteran’
would be conferred upon any former member of the Canadian Forces
who had achieved ‘trained’ status by meeting military occupation
classification standards and had subsequently received an honourable
discharge.”18
In March 2004, the VAC-CF Advisory Council published a discussion
paper entitled Honouring Canada’s Commitment: “Opportunity with
Security” for Canadian Forces Veterans and Their Families in the 21st
Century. The discussion paper was supported by a reference paper The
Origins and Evolution of Veterans Benefits in Canada 1914-2004 that
traced the historical Canadian government support for veterans.19
Opportunity with Security was published to make the point that the time
had come for comprehensive reform of the programs providing support
to veterans, CF members and their families.
On 16 September 2003, the VAC-DND Advisory Council launched a
Service and Program Modernization Task Force to develop a
comprehensive and improved suite of programs and services to aid the
successful transition of CF members and families to civilian life.20
The
Task Force was guided by seventeen principles and the following six
priority issues:
a. a complete and thorough overhaul of the way that veterans and CF members are compensated for injury, based on “no-
18
Ibid., 21 and 24. 19
Ibid., and The Origins and Evolution of Veterans Benefits in Canada 1914-2004, Veterans Affairs Canada (March
2004), http://www.veterans.gc.ca/clients/sub.cfm?source=forces/nvc/reference. 20
VAC-DND Advisory Council, Opportunity with Security, 25-26.
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/clients/sub.cfm?source=forces/nvc/reference
-
11
fault” principles and with consideration given to coordination
of the Pension Act and SISIP;
b. a robust program of transition services and benefits;
c. enhance support provided to spouses and children, particularly in the areas of health care and structural
economic inequalities;
d. expansion of existing health-care benefits; e. acknowledgment of the government’s “duty to
accommodate” disabled members of the CF through an
enhanced priority for employment in the Public Service; and
f. the provision of equitable access to funeral and burial benefits.
This work eventually led to the NVC passed in Parliament and enacted
on 1 April 2006.
Beyond that background, there has been no thoughtful public discussion
of the nature or substance of a broadly understood ‘social contract’ that
should exist between the people of Canada and the military personnel
they send to fight on their behalf. Such a discussion took place internally
in the CF in the late 1990s, but never became a public debate that could
have informed and legitimized subsequent reforms.21
We suggest it is
time for a meaningful discussion to be held in Parliament concerning a
social contract linking Canadians and their veterans.
Our committee found that there should be more discussion with
Provincial and territorial governments for the provision of care,
treatment and benefits for veterans and their families. We acknowledge
that serving CF personnel are excluded from the provisions of the
Canada Health Act, but veterans and military families are eligible for
provincial health care services at least to the degree enjoyed by other
Canadians living in a specific province or territory. When CF Reservists
return home from full time service and take off their uniform, they too
return to being eligible for provincial health care services. There are 21
A series of discussion papers was produced in 1997 on the pertinence of a social contract between the military and
the people of Canada.
-
12
different degrees and standards of health care services available to the
families of veterans and military personnel across the country.
We therefore recommend that:
Recommendation 1. The Government of Canada table a document
that articulates and promotes the social contract between the
people of Canada and their veterans.
Recommendation 2. The Government of Canada encourage the
provinces and territories to endorse the social contract to reflect a
common understanding and acceptance of the needs of veterans.
Such endorsement should not interfere with provincial or territorial
constitutional rights.
Recommendation 3. The Veterans Bill of Rights include
appropriate rights to be enjoyed by veterans. These rights would be
based on the veterans’ and their spouses’ acknowledgement of
unlimited liability in the service of Canada.
Are families clients too?
There is no doubt that military families share the burden of military
service and that the families of injured and disabled veterans and CF
members are especially involved in and are often responsible for care-
giving. In the CF, families are considered as ‘operational enablers’ that
provide important home front support for deployed personnel. We
understand the challenges they face. We heard of concerns for how these
families are compensated and treated. One disabled senior officer told us
of the impact of his injury on his family:
The family dynamic is fundamentally changed for the rest of
the family’s life. ...I want to emphasize this point. ...There has
been no compensation, as far as I am concerned, for the loss
of my family’s quality of life.
-
13
We talk the good talk, but when it comes to the New Veterans
Charter, we are definitely not walking the walk, and the
families are the ones that suffer. Everyone looks at the
soldier and says’ “Oh, poor man, he is missing his legs.” I
can tell you... during my training, the difficulties I have
encountered, the chronic pain, the quality of life – all of that
pales in comparison to what happened to my family.22
We admire the strength and dedication of the families of injured and
disabled veterans and CF members. We must, with great respect, clarify
their position vis-a-vis legislation and regulations.
While the word ‘family’ is not currently present in NVC legislation, it is
present within its regulations. In the regulations, it is found in two
paragraphs, both of which encourage the Minister to involve the family
in the design and provision of rehabilitation and vocational assistance
plans.23
The NVC, while it may recognize spouses, survivors and
dependents individually, does not specifically cater to the broader
collective notion of ‘family.’
Unless they are survivors or dependents of a deceased veteran or CF
member military families are not independently entitled to compensation
or benefits provided by NVC programs.
Civilian members of military families are not eligible for CF health care
services. They are entitled to provincial health care services, just like
any other Canadian citizen. The associated issue is that not all military
families have access to a local family doctor, given that some military
bases are located far from major population centres. In these
circumstances, the CF have traditionally done what they could to assist
military families in emergencies and connect them with civilian health
care professionals.
22
Major Mark Campbell, Proceedings of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs “Evidence,” 16 June 2010,
http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/05evb-
e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79. 23
Justice Canada, Canadian Forces and Veterans Reestablishment and Compensation Regulations, Paragraphs 8(b)
and 9(b), http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/SOR-2006-50/page-2.html#anchorbo-ga:l_2-gb:s_7.
http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/05evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/05evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/SOR-2006-50/page-2.html#anchorbo-ga:l_2-gb:s_7
-
14
In October 2009, the NVCAG published a report in which their first
recommendation called upon government to strengthen family support
services.24
It suggested that VAC should take a number of steps,
including educating the appropriate VAC staff, service providers and the
public about Veterans’ and families’ right to services, developing a
covenant for Veteran families, reviewing the eligibility criteria for all
programs to ensure family members have equitable access, and
continuing to develop service models that treat Veterans and families
with respect. There were five supporting strategies:
a. Take steps to create and maintain a respectful, family-centred culture in all VAC programs;
b. Fill service gaps to ease the transition to civilian life; c. Improve access to skilled, knowledgeable health care
providers;
d. Provide more support for family members caring for Veterans;
e. Provide more support for survivors and families of the Fallen.
We have seen evidence that VAC is currently working to increase its
recognition of veterans’ families, toward the same degree they are
recognized and supported within DND and the CF. We encourage VAC
to continue to act on the NVCAG recommendations, and therefore
recommend that:
Recommendation 4. Within the framework of the New Veterans
Charter, Veterans Affairs Canada increase their efforts to promote
and address family roles and requirements associated with injuries
and disabilities suffered in the line of duty.
While more could be done within VAC to enhance support for veterans’
families, we wish to point out that not all the criticisms we heard,
associated with the NVC, can be entirely directed at one department.
VAC, as a department of government, does have specific responsibilities
24
NVCAG, Honouring Our Committement¸1.
-
15
to implement certain Acts with regard to veterans and related affairs, but
it also has a responsibility to coordinate other government activity
associated with the care and treatment of veterans and their families. The
provision of care, treatment and benefits for CF personnel, veterans and
their families is a ‘whole-of-government’ obligation.
VAC’s Relationship with Veterans
Some disabled CF members that testified before our committee
expressed that they have concerns about VAC’s ability to care for them
upon release. Also we found that a majority of disabled military
personnel want to remain in the CF.
CF leadership has in recent years adopted a flexible approach to the
release of injured soldiers who can no longer meet the stringent
universality of service standards. Many disabled soldiers have been
given employment appropriate to their medical condition; new units
have been formed to assist in their recovery or transition; and a number
of innovative programs have been established within the CF, some with
VAC support, to complement medical treatment programs.
There is an appreciation of top-down loyalty in the CF and a culture
based on a sense of grave responsibility. This solemn sense of
responsibility gives meaning to the actions of a CF member. If this ethos
is not recognized or valued when the member becomes a veteran, the
very meaning of service is lost too. It is therefore not surprising that
serving soldiers who appeared before our Subcommittee indicated that
most soldiers wanted to continue serving, although they reluctantly
admitted they would have to leave at some point. Such enthusiasm can
be, in large part, explained by the traditional pull of military comraderie,
esprit de corps, and a deep sense of trust that the institution will take
care of them. Disabled serving personnel worry about being released
because they see no clear equivalent manifestation of top-down care in
government at large.
-
16
One young soldier expressed his concerns this way:
With all of the negativity that has gone on about it, they
[soldiers] do not have peace of mind. They are worried that
if they get hurt, they will have to go through a massive,
lengthy process. ...On the military side, people are fighting to
stay in for as long as they can because they do not want to
deal with Veterans Affairs.25
Another disabled soldier told us that:
Many of us are trying to stay in [the CF] as long as possible
to prolong having to deal with Veterans Affairs Canada
because everyone I talk to says that they are difficult to deal
with.26
And yet another disabled veteran expressed this opinion:
I knew that DND would always be there for me. Many
soldiers... do not want a 25 per cent pay cut, and they want to
ensure that they get all their stuff and have an employer that
completely understands their state of mind and their well-
being. ...To stay in uniform in the forces, is better, without a
doubt.27
The Subcommittee recognizes that the Joint Personnel Support Unit
(JPSU) and its subordinate satellite Integrated Personnel Support
Centres (IPSCs) located on major CF bases across the country are
having a positive impact on the relationship between serving CF soldiers
and VAC staff co-located with CF staff in the IPSCs. We are confident
25
Corporal Michael McTeague, Proceedings of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, “Evidence,”26 May 2010,
http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/04eva-
e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79. 26
Master Corporal Jodi Mitic, Proceedings of the Senate Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, “Evidence,/ 12 May
2010, http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/03evb-
e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79. 27
Master Corporal Paul Franklin (Retired), Proceedings of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, “Evidence,” 12
May 2010, http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/03evb-
e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79.
http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/04eva-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/04eva-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/03evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/03evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/03evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/03evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79
-
17
that the type of opinions above, expressed by serving soldiers, will
become increasingly rare as more troops and more experienced VAC
staff are able to get together in person.
Communication
We heard witnesses state that there was a definite lack of effective
communication between VAC and serving CF members. While there
may be some difficulty with the quality of VAC outreach initiatives,
there is at least an equal onus that must fall on the CF chain of command
to become more engaged in ensuring serving personnel are fully aware
of VAC programs and how to access them.
An earlier section discussed the VAC evaluation of the NVC conducted
from 2009 to 2011. One of the principal findings was the need to
develop a more effective outreach strategy, one element of which was an
improved communications program. Among the suggestions was the
idea that VAC share information with CF members earlier in the process
leading to release. This is being done through the IPSCs.
Communication with CF and veterans’ families also received attention
because families are often instrumental in having a CF member or
veteran seek assistance. Families must have access to clear and concise
information, particularly in times of crisis and this has been recognized
within VAC. The Subcommittee looks forward to some concrete
improvement in this area.
PERCEIVED LIMITATIONS OF THE NVC
CF personnel have accepted unlimited liability to their country by
putting their life on the line for Canada. It is thought that any program
of care, compensation and benefits available to those who are disabled
or killed as a result of service should be the best Canada has to offer.
-
18
Recognizing that the NVC is a living document, our first observation is
that, unlike the inspired work conducted leading up to the NVC, the
NVC itself and the regulations supporting it fall short of expectations.
On 11 May 2005, during the examination of Bill C-45 by the Standing
Senate Committee on National Finance, Mr. Darragh Mogan, the
Executive Director, Service and Program Modernization Task Force,
accompanying the Honourable Albina Guarnieri, Minister of Veterans
Affairs, was asked by Senator Kinsella to explain why NVC clients had
to apply for the Earnings Loss Benefit (ELB) within one hundred and
twenty days of being released from the CF. Mr. Mogan replied:
The number was chosen because an existing rehabilitation
program under the authority of the Chief of the Defence Staff,
the Service Income Security Insurance Plan, SISIP, has that
120-day limit. We do not want to create two standards.28
Associated government analysis describes the NVC as being designed to
fill gaps in existing services and benefits. According to the Canada
Gazette:
These [NVC] programs will be implemented in collaboration
with other government departments and agencies involved in
the delivery of similar programs. VAC's intent in delivering
these new programs is to fill existing gaps in services and
benefits. For example, the New Veterans Charter will bolster
the current benefit packages provided by the Service Income
Security Insurance Plan (SISIP) and VAC. Most CF members
who voluntarily release and later develop a service-related
disability could, up to now, only qualify for a VAC pension
and related health care. SISIP will continue to provide
eligible medically releasing CF members with income
replacement and vocational rehabilitation benefits. Under
28
Darragh Mogan, Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance, "Evidence,” 11 May 2005,
http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/fina-e/23ev-
e.htm?Language=E&Parl=38&Ses=1&comm_id=13.
http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/fina-e/23ev-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=38&Ses=1&comm_id=13http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/fina-e/23ev-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=38&Ses=1&comm_id=13
-
19
the New Veterans Charter, VAC will meet the needs of the
"gap" group and will provide top-up benefits for the SISIP
group, such as additional vocational rehabilitation or
earnings loss benefits, medical or psychosocial
rehabilitation, and Canadian Forces income support. VAC
will work closely with SISIP to ensure a comparable level of
benefits, regardless of whether the client's avenue of access
is SISIP or VAC.29
Some of the witnesses who appeared in front of this Subcommittee
believed that the NVC is less effective than it should be. Dr. Maria
Barrados, President of the Public Service Commission of Canada told
us:
Public servants, however, have much more protection and
many more provisions than members of the Armed Forces
have. If someone is injured, many insurances and programs
are in place to reintegrate people back into the workforce. ...
Much would take place in the public service before they
would end up on a disability priority....
We acknowledge that using the SISIP model for benefits such as the
Earnings Loss and Vocational Rehabilitation Program was done to make
the transition from the Canadian Forces to Veterans Affairs as seamless
as possible. That being said, programs such as the Permanent
Impairment Allowance, the Permanent Impairment Allowance
Supplement and the Disability Award are benefit programs designed
using criteria such as typical Veterans Affairs and more broadly
Government of Canada programming models.
Using an insurance plan designed for non-service related injuries for
some of the financial benefits included in the NVC supports the point
made earlier that there has been no substantial public discussion of the
29
Canada Gazette, Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-establishment and Compensation Regulations,
“Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement,” Vol. 139, No. 51, 17 December 2005,
http://www.gazette.gc.ca/archives/p1/2005/2005-12-17/html/reg7-eng.html.
http://www.gazette.gc.ca/archives/p1/2005/2005-12-17/html/reg7-eng.html
-
20
nature of a social contract between the people of Canada and their
veterans.
Sense of Security
Historically, almost all of Canada’s wartime veterans enrolled ‘for the
duration’ to serve as long as needed to defeat the enemy. Many gave up
civilian jobs, vocations and professions to serve abroad. Some were
unemployed and welcomed the chance to travel and earn some money,
even if they would be doing it in the context of a war. These wartime
veterans traditionally did not plan to make a career of military service.
Large scale demobilization took place at the end of the First and Second
World Wars, and a less, but still substantial de-mobilization occurred
after the Korean War. Accordingly, as explained earlier, government
programs aimed to re-integrate hundreds of thousands of veterans back
into Canadian civilian life at the end of hostilities.
Coincidently with the Korean War, military personnel began to enrol in
the Regular Force with the intent to spend a good number of years in
military service, if not a career. They intended to serve Canada, work
hard and perhaps get promoted to higher ranks with greater
responsibility. They made life plans based on those long-term intentions.
Many of those plans included raising a family. If all went well,
individual and family goals would be met. Over time, the CF has
become a career-oriented force.
Today, most Regular Force members of the CF being released require a
different approach to preparing for re-integration into civilian society
because most of them have spent their entire adult life in military
service. They have no previous ‘civilian life’ to ‘return’ to.
It is interesting to note that today’s reservists might have more in
common with wartime veterans than they do with their contemporary
Regular Force colleagues. Reservists are regularly volunteering to serve
on an international operation for a contracted period of time, at the end
-
21
of which, they return to their civilian employment, or other
circumstances from which they came. They may indeed intend to
continue serving part-time, but they will essentially ‘return’ to civilian
life after their tour of full-time duty. If they are severely injured or
disabled, they will continue to serve full-time until they either recover,
or are medically released from the CF. Reservists receive the same
benefits as Regular Force Members if they are injured while deployed or
training with the Regular Force for deployment. Moreover, in December
of 2012, Minister of National Defence, Peter Mackay announced a
regulation change that gave all reservists the same coverage under the
Injured Military Members Compensation Act.
An important requirement is that the NVC recognize and address these
circumstances. In large part, it does so. However, it apparently does not
generate an adequate sense of security among some of today’s veterans
who are injured or disabled as a result of service and subsequently
medically released.
In the view of serving soldiers who are hurt, their first thought is
focussed on the future security of their family, not so much on how
much money they will individually get. This is particularly true of those
with young families. This perspective was also especially apparent in
discussions about the lump-sum Disability Award. According to Master
Corporal Jodi Mitic, “[i]t is not about the money; it is about security.”30
Major Bruce Henwood (Retired), Chair of the VAC Special Needs
Advisory Group, offered this opinion:
What you have not heard in your various testimonies – and I
reviewed them all – is the difference between a traditional
veteran and a new veteran when it comes to financial
security. You have been exposed to some of the new and
essential elements of the New Veteran s Charter that may
work very well for the majority of the veterans who have not
experienced severe, life-altering, career-ending quality of life
30
Mitic, Proceedings, 12 May 2010.
-
22
challenges as the seriously injured veterans do, on a daily
basis.
What you have not heard is that the seriously injured new
veterans’ family no longer received a spousal allowance, no
longer receives children allowances, no longer receives an
attendants allowance and no longer receives an Exceptional
Incapacity Allowance. ...All four of these allowances are for
life. They are tax free; they are indexed; and they are paid on
a monthly basis. These allowances provide the traditional
veterans with financial security over their life course.
I will say this once and I will say it as forcefully as I can;
these are all gone in the New Veterans Charter – gone.31
Some element of this difficulty lies in a lack of effective
communications, by both VAC and the CF. Some CF members have not
been adequately informed about the full range of NVC programs
available to them and how they can be accessed. Junior ranks who came
before us consistently fixated on the lump-sum issue when expressing
concern for their long-term security condition. Some CF members
expressed that they also could do more to access the information
available to them. They admitted to not being well-informed on the wide
range of other NVC programs available to them and their spouses.
To qualify for NVC benefits, veterans must be approved by the Minister
for enrolment in an authorized rehabilitation program. That is to say,
beyond the Disability Award, the only gateway to NVC vocational and
financial benefits is through an approved rehabilitation program.
31
Major Bruce Henwood (Retired), Chair, Special Needs Advisory Group, Proceedings of the Subcommittee on
Veterans Affairs, “Evidence,” 16 June 2010, http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-
e/05evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79.
http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/05evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/05evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79
-
23
Quality of life
From the viewpoint of some injured CF soldiers waiting to hear if their
injury is severe enough to have them medically released from the CF,
the prospect of having to deal with the VAC bureaucracy can be
challenging and frustrating.
A young Master Corporal, supporting a wife and one young child on
$58,000 a year, who loses both legs below the knee in Afghanistan
would have received in 2012 a non-taxable $293,308 lump sum
Disability Award from VAC, or divided in annual instalments. If he
enrols in a rehabilitation program after release, he will then receive 75%
of his pre-injury salary in the form of a taxable Earnings Loss Benefit
(ELB). The ELB is designed to ensure an injured veteran has income
that is at least 75% of his pre-release salary, so if he has a CF pension or
other income from a private business, his ELB will be adjusted
according.
As military personnel rise in rank, those who are medically released
receive less of an ELB from VAC, since they will begin to receive
military pension payments provided for in the Canadian Forces
Superannuation Act. In general, proportionally, the more senior in rank,
the less an injured veteran’s income will come from VAC.
There is thus a perception among many disabled soldiers, especially
those who are junior in rank, that they will be less well-off under the
NVC than they are in the CF. Seventy-five per cent of a Master
Corporal’s annual salary of $58,000 is considerably less than seventy-
five per cent of a Major’s $98,000 salary.
Given that the bulk of junior ranks – Privates, Corporals and Master
Corporals; and Lieutenants and Captains – are the ones who are most
often and most heavily engaged in combat, it might be viewed as
restrictive by some be to have their level of income capped at seventy-
five per cent of their salary upon release. Some may have expected to
-
24
spend many years in uniform, and to receive promotions with the
accompanying pay increases.
It should be noted that amendments to the Regulations have introduced a
guaranteed minimum income of $40,000 to veterans who were
medically released and participate in a rehabilitation program. But is this
enough? Some argue that it is not and that junior ranks in particular can
expect difficulties supporting themselves and their families on such an
income.
There are several suggestions that may provide assistance to the above
described limitations. These include raising the minimum ELB in one of
two ways:
a. make the ELB non-taxable; b. raise the ELB to a higher level and keep it taxable.
The second approach may address any limitations perceived by a person
who becomes disabled and medically released before being able to enjoy
the fruits of a military career of a reasonable length.
Unlike the First and Second World Wars and the Korean War, Canadian
soldiers who enlisted in the Cold War era, including those who join the
CF today, generally intend to stay in military service for many years.
Many choose to make a career of it. Consequently, they hope to rise in
rank and tentatively make plans in light of such a positive future. Not
everyone expects to become the Chief of the Defence Staff, but
independent studies have shown that in today’s CF, the average
Canadian who joins as a Private can reasonably expect to reach the rank
of Sergeant over the span of a 30 year career. In the officer ranks, the
average Canadian will probably reach the rank of Major in the same
amount of time.
It has been suggested that if a soldier is disabled in the junior non-
commissioned ranks and in the junior officer ranks, that the minimum
level of ELB awarded under the ELB would be based on the basic rate
of pay of a captain, for officers ($72,960 in 2012) and the basic rate of
-
25
pay of a sergeant, for non-commissioned members ($63,720 in 2012).32
It has been further suggested that these amounts be kept in step with the
actual pay levels provided to serving members at any one time. In other
words, the pay rate for these veterans would be equivalent to those still
serving.
We therefore recommend that:
Recommendation 5. The Government of Canada continue to
review the Earnings Loss Benefit to ensure veterans are receiving
the appropriate level of compensation.
Reintegration into Civilian Life
Expert testimony heard by the Subcommittee made the clear point that it
is in the best interests of disabled CF personnel to accept their injury and
move on to a new life outside the CF, as soon and as best they can. As
Mr. Wolfgang Zimmerman, Executive Director of the National Institute
of Disability Management and Research explained:
I have been privileged to have been involved with the New
Veterans' Charter advisory committee, and I can say that we
are not seeing interface between DND and Veterans Affairs
to support an optimum return-to-work outcome. In other
words, individuals are being kept at DND for much too long
before an active effort is made to ensure that there is a
speedy return-to-work outcome.33
Remaining in uniform may be necessary in the short term, particularly
when undergoing treatment and rehabilitation, but it is not a final or
permanent measure.
32
In 2012, basic monthly pay rates for a sergeant is $5,310 ($63,720 per year) and for a captain $6,080 ($72,960 per
year). DND, Pay Scales, Consulted 11 September 2012. 33
Wolfgang Zimmerman, Proceedings of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, “Evidence,” 1 December 2010,
http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/09eva-
e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79.
http://www.forces.ca/en/page/payscales-131#ncmsregular-3http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/09eva-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/09eva-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79
-
26
During the course of our study, the question arose of whether enough
was being done to provide meaningful employment for disabled
veterans. Employing disabled veterans in the Public Service of Canada is
one such case.
CF personnel are not members of the Public Service (PS). Consequently,
they are not employees of the Government of Canada. For many years
CF personnel were not eligible to participate in the PS internal
appointment process. This changed on 31 December 2005, when the
Public Service Employment Act was amended to allow CF personnel
participation in the advertised internal appointment process, where they
have been identified as being eligible by deputy heads of departments.34
Such identification is an option open to deputy heads; it is not a
mandatory designation.35
Beyond this general entitlement36
to apply for positions in the PS is the
question of actual appointment to a specific job. Dr. Maria Barrados, the
President of the Public Service Commission of Canada told the
Subcommittee that since 1997, certain CF personnel have enjoyed
priority entitlement to a job in the PS, upon release from the CF as a
result of an injury suffered in a Special Duty Area. In 2004, the
entitlement was extended to all those released because of a disability
sustained in the course of Special Duty Service, at home or abroad. On
31 December, the entitlement was further expanded to include former
members of the CF and the RCMP who were released for medical
reasons.37
34
Justice Canada, Public Service Employment Act, 2003, http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/P-33.01/index.html. 35
Dr. Maria Barrados, Proceedings of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, “Evidence,” 24 November 2010,
http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/08evb-
e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79. 36
Entitlement: This term is often used in VAC documentation to refer to the distinction between a veteran who is
merely ‘eligible’ to a given benefit, and a veteran who is ‘entitled’ to the same benefit. ‘Eligible’ means the veteran
can apply to receive the benefit, whereas ‘entitled’ means that the eligible veteran who applied will in fact receive
the benefit. For an example of the distinction, see the brochure “Disability Benefits. Entitlement Eligibility
Guidelines” at: http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/services/disability-benefits/benefits-determined/entitlement-
eligibility-guidelines. 37
Dr. Maria Barrados, Proceedings of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, “Evidence,” 24 November 2010,
http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/08evb-
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/P-33.01/index.htmlhttp://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/08evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/08evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/services/disability-benefits/benefits-determined/entitlement-eligibility-guidelineshttp://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/services/disability-benefits/benefits-determined/entitlement-eligibility-guidelineshttp://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/08evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79
-
27
There has been a significant upward trend in the number of priority
entitlements for former CF and RCMP members in recent years – 301 in
2009-10, up from 259 in 2008-09. In fiscal year 2009-10, 215 former
members of the CF and RCMP were appointed to positions in the PS,
compared with 205 in 2008-09.38
The central issue is whether the federal government should consider
releasing CF members to become ‘government employees’ and therefore
be given the opportunity to an actual prioritized appointment to suitable
employment, rather than just the right to apply for priority appointment.
Treating medically released CF members as government employees
would require government to actively seek and place disabled veterans
in jobs suitable to their condition and circumstances. This is more than
simply allowing them to apply for employment in the PS. Particularly if
there were some sort of framework of federal-provincial cooperation, the
chances of finding timely employment for a disabled veteran would be
increased, given the range of jobs available.
We therefore recommend that:
Recommendation 6. The Government of Canada consider
streamlining the way that veterans are able to access the internal
appointment process throughout the federal public service and
ensure that veterans are given priority and assistance in the
process.
Outreach
The Joint Personnel Support Unit/Integrated Personnel Support Centres
(JPSU/IPSC) are working well. However, there is still a need to keep
track of rural Reservists. Better use may be made of the Royal Canadian
e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79. Most of the information in this section is taken from her
testimony. 38
Public Service Commission of Canada, “Table 21: Canadian Forces and Royal Canadian Mounted Police: New
entitlements compared to appointments,” Public Service Commission Annual Report 2009-10, 121, http://www.psc-
cfp.gc.ca/arp-rpa/2010/rpt-eng.pdf.
http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/08evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79http://www.psc-cfp.gc.ca/arp-rpa/2010/rpt-eng.pdfhttp://www.psc-cfp.gc.ca/arp-rpa/2010/rpt-eng.pdf
-
28
Legion and the various service, branch and regimental associations who
know where individuals are.
We recommend that:
Recommendation 7. Veterans Affairs Canada and key
stakeholders establish more effective formal links to better support
veterans.
Recommendation 8. Veterans Affairs Canada, in concert with the
Royal Canadian Legion, consider establishing representation in
support of Legion branches.
Recommendation 9. Veterans Affairs Canada consider involving
more veterans throughout Canada to enhance the relevance of their
outreach activities.
Disability Award
There are three areas of concern directed at the Disability Award. Some
witnesses were unclear as to the nature and purpose of the award, some
felt it was inadequate and some suggested that it was inappropriate to
pay out the Disability Award in one large sum to a CF member or
veteran who may not be in a fit physical or mental state to make sound
decisions on what to do with the money.
Since October 2011, the disability award may be paid as a lump-sum or
in instalments. This seems to have appeased concerns about misuse by
injured veterans. However, a significant proportion of veterans will
choose to receive the disability award as a lump sum.
To review, VAC may pay a Disability Award to a member of the CF or
a veteran who is disabled by a service-related injury or disease, or a non-
service-related injury or disease aggravated by service.39
The amount
39
NVC, Paragraph 45.
-
29
awarded is commensurate with the degree of disability. The maximum
amount in the original legislation was capped at $250,000. Since then,
being indexed for inflation, the current maximum Disability Award for
2012 is $293,308.40
Among those CF members and veterans who came before the
Subcommittee, there was some confusion as to the true purpose of the
Disability Award. Consider this testimony from one witness:
Depending on what Veterans Affairs Canada literature you
read, the department keeps changing its tune on what that
maximum $250,000 one-time lump sum payment is for. I have
been told it is compensation for the loss of your limbs. I have
read that it is compensation for pain and suffering, and I
have also read that it is now intended to assist in satisfying
the immediate financial needs of the injured soldier.41
The VAC website is clear and states, “The Disability Award is a one-
time, tax-free cash award designed to compensate for the non-economic
impacts of a service-related disability such as pain and suffering.”42
The
NVC Disability Award is not intended to be used for necessary home
renovations, prosthetics or automobile adaptations. There are other funds
and programs available to meet those requirements.
Perhaps this misunderstanding of the Disability Award is the basis of
criticism that the NVC is inadequate. The same witness explained:
I can tell you my $250,000 disappeared very, very quickly. I
had to buy a brand new minivan for $32,000 because they
would only modify a brand new vehicle. Also, since my house
was deemed unsuitable for renovation to make it wheelchair
40
Veterans Affairs Canada, http://www.veterans.gc.ca/clients/sub.cfm?source=Forces/nvc/da_db_include. 41
Major Mark Campbell, Proceedings of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, “Evidence,” 16 June 2010,
http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/05evb-
e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79. 42
VAC, Current or Former Canadian Forces Members Services and Benefits, “Disability Benefits,”
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/general/sub.cfm?source=information-canadian-forces/services-benefits/disability-
benefits. See also NVC, Paragraph 45-56.
http://www.veterans.gc.ca/clients/sub.cfm?source=Forces/nvc/da_db_includehttp://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/05evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79http://www.parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/05evb-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=79http://www.veterans.gc.ca/general/sub.cfm?source=information-canadian-forces/services-benefits/disability-benefitshttp://www.veterans.gc.ca/general/sub.cfm?source=information-canadian-forces/services-benefits/disability-benefits
-
30
accessible, I had to sell that house and construct a new
barrier-free home. That money was gone immediately.
Depending on what we are calling it and what it is for, is
$250,000 adequate compensation for the loss of your legs
and the loss of quality of life for your family? It completely
disrupts the entire family; it is not just the soldier. Everything
is upside down. My wife has twice the stress.
I have chronic phantom limb pain two or three nights a week
where I cannot sleep. Is $250,000 adequate compensation for
that and for a lifetime of pain and suffering? I would suggest
it is not.
I would also suggest a cap of $250,000 based on the loss of
two limbs, or the equivalent in terms of eyesight, is
completely inadequate. What about the soldier I know, a
young reserve corporal in Sudbury, who is missing not just
both legs but also an arm? He received no additional
compensation for that arm. Once you max out at $250,000
that is it. Half of my injuries... are not considered because I
maxed out with two legs. The ruptured right eardrum and the
loss of hearing are not compensated in any way, shape or
form.43
It is difficult to measure such unsettling distress, but the
Subcommittee notes that the NVC Disability Award is not the only sum
awarded to CF members or veterans, at government expense, for pain
and suffering. All serving CF members, both Regular and Reserve Force
are covered, at no charge, by the Accidental Dismemberment Insurance
Plan (ADIP), sponsored by the CF and governed by the Treasury Board
of Canada.44
The ADIP may pay a maximum disability benefit of
$250,000 for, as examples, the loss of two feet, or two hands. In this
43
Campbell, Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, 16 June 2010. 44
See details of the ADIP on the Service Income Security Insurance Plan Financial Services (SISIP FS) website at
http://sisip.com/en/Insurance_e/ad_e.asp#1.
http://sisip.com/en/Insurance_e/ad_e.asp#1
-
31
way, as a result programs entirely funded by government, CF members
or veterans disabled as a result of service might receive up to $500,000.
CONCLUSION
Veterans and CF members have accepted unlimited liability in the
service of Canada. Those who die or are injured in the course of duty
deserve the best program of compensation and benefits Canada can
provide. VAC and the NVC are serving the majority of CF members,
veterans and their families well, but the NVC can be enhanced to
provide improved compensation and benefits and provide a sense of
security for disabled CF members, veterans and their families.
Government as a whole should endeavour to ensure its broad obligations
are met, not just in a majority of cases, but in every case.
-
A
LIST OF WITNESSES
40th Parliament – 3rd Session
Organization Name/Title Date of
Appearance
Army, Navy and Air
Force Veterans in
Canada
Lorne McCartney,
Dominion Secretary-
Treasurer
June 2, 1010
As individuals
Deborah Norris,
Associate Professor,
Family Studies and
Gerontology, Mount Saint
Vincent University
December 15,
2010
Majory (ret’d) Bruce
Henwood, Chair, Special
Needs Advisory Group
(SNAG), Veterans Affairs
Canada June 16, 2010
Major Mark Campbell,
Regimental Veterans Care
Officer, Princess
Patricia’s Canadian Light
Infantry
Dr. Don Richardson,
Consultant Psychiatrist,
Ste. Anne’s Hospital
June 9, 2010
MCpl (Ret.) Paul Franklin May 12, 2010
Canadian Association
of Veterans in United
Nations Peacekeeping
Ronald R. Griffis,
National President June 2, 2010
-
B
Organization Name/Title Date of
Appearance
Royal Canadian
Legion
Brad White, Dominion
Secretary October 27,
2010 Pierre Allard, Service
Bureau Director
National Defence
Colonel Gerard Blais,
Director Casualty Support
Management
November 24,
2010
Corporal Thomas
Bezruki, Royal Highland
Fusiliers of Canada
May 26, 2010
Corporal Michael
McTeague, 32nd Combat
Engineer Regiment
Corporal Dominique
Lareau, Régiment de la
Chaudière
Corporal Jean-Pierre
Godbout, 35th Service
Battalion of Canada
Master Corporal Martial
Boivert, 12e Régiment
blindé du Canada
Major Jacques Lasalle,
Officer Commanding of
the Join Personnel
Support Unite (JPSU)
Quebec Region
May 12, 2010
-
C
Organization Name/Title Date of
Appearance
National Defence
Master Corporal Jody
Mitic, Outreach
Coordinator, National
Defence Headquarters,
DCSM May 12, 2010
Corporal Martin Renaud,
3rd
Battalion, Royall 22nd
Regiment
Lieutenant-Colonel C.M.
Hand, CD, Commanding
Officer Joint Personnel
Support Unite, New
Brunswick/PEI region
May 5, 2010
National Institute of
Disability
Management and
Research
Wolfgang Zimmermann,
Executive Director December 1,
2010
Public Service
Commission of
Canada
Maria Barrados, President
November 24,
2010 Janelle Wright, Director,
Delegation and Reporting,
Policy Branch
Veterans Affairs The Honourable Jean-
Pierre Blackburn, P.C.,
M.P., Minister of
Veterans Affairs and
Minister of State
(Agriculture)
April 28, 2010
-
D
Organization Name/Title Date of
Appearance
Veterans Affairs
Canada
The Honourable Jean-
Pierre Blackburn, P.C.,
M.P., Minister of
Veterans Affairs and
Minister of State
(Agriculture)
November 17,
2010
Suzanne Tining, Deputy
Minister
Colonel (Ret’d) Patrick
Stogran, Veterans
Ombudsman
November 3,
2010
Charlotte Stewart,
Director General, Service
Delivery Management
October 20,
2010 Charlotte Bastien,
Regional Director
General, Québec, Service
Delivery and
Commemoration
Sandra Williamson,
Director, Strategic Policy,
Policy Programs and
Partnerships October 6, 2010
Raymond Lalonde,
Director, Strategic Policy,
Policy Programs and
Partnership
-
E
Organization Name/Title Date of
Appearance
Veterans Affairs
Canada
Nathalie Pham, Manager,
Client Services Team,
Montreal District Office
June 9, 2010
Charlotte Bastien,
Regional Director
General, Quebec Region May 5, 2010
Robert Cormier, Director,
Montreal district
Lina Matos, Regional
Director, Client Services,
Western Region
Katherine Richards-Solc,
Manager, Client Service
Team, Kingston District
Office
June 9, 2010
Suzanne Tining, Deputy
Minister April 28, 2010
Workplace Safety &
Insurance Board of
Ontario
Paul Gilkinson,